On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:38:39PM -0400, Lawrence Teo wrote: > Marc Espie wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:04:26PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 03:18:38PM -0400, Lawrence Teo wrote: >>> >>>> Attached is a port for version 2 of LZO, the high-speed data compression >>>> library (version 1 is in the ports tree as archivers/lzo). >>>> >>>> According to the LZO website, version 2 features "major speedups for >>>> 64-bit architectures like AMD64, minor overall speedups, portability >>>> enhancements for LLP64 programming models, and lots of other small >>>> improvements." The full changelog is at: >>>> >>>> http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/lzonews.php >>>> >>>> The port is also available at: >>>> >>>> http://labs.calyptix.com/openbsd-ports/lzo2.tar.gz >>>> >>>> lzo and lzo2 can both be installed on the same system without >>>> conflicting with each other. >>>> >>>> Passes regress on amd64 and i386. I would really appreciate testing >>>> on other platforms. Thank you! >>>> >>> Passes regress and seems to work fine @sparc64. >>> Dunno if it can replace/supersede the original lzo 1.x though. >>> Thanks! >>> >> >> Does not, cannot so far... >> I've looked at it a while ago, and it's really designed to coexist. >> Maybe it's a good idea to have it, the new versions of dxpc can use it, >> for instance. >> > Landry, thank you for testing it on sparc64. Marc, thank you for your > feedback. > > I haven't tested it extensively yet but it looks like openvpn can > use lzo2 too if it's available. For me, I started tinkering on lzo2 > when I found that it was a dependency for lrzip. > > I would appreciate some advice about where to install the header > files: > > lzo version 1 (for brevity I'll refer to it as lzo1 from now on) > installs the header files into ${LOCALBASE}/include/ > > lzo2, as distributed by the author, installs them into > ${LOCALBASE}/include/lzo/ > > I felt that was ambiguous because include/lzo/ could refer to > either lzo1 or lzo2. So I made the lzo2 port install the header > files into ${LOCALBASE}/include/lzo2/ instead. > > However, after examining programs like lrzip, dxpc, and openvpn, I > found that all of them try to detect lzo2 in include/lzo/ by > default. > > So I'm thinking of removing my patch so that the lzo2 port will > install the header files into include/lzo/ (as intended by its > author) -- it sacrifices clarity, but should result in less work to > port programs that depend on it. > > For example, my experiment with dxpc shows that I will have to > create three patches if the header files are in include/lzo2. But no > patches are required if the header files are in include/lzo. > > Any thoughts from the more experienced porters?
Don't patch ports if it's not _necessary_.. as simple as that from my point of view. The author made some work to make both coexist this way, so keep it like that. Adding a note/comment somewhere in Makefile/PLIST is the way to go imho. Landry
